why Latin?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Blessed_is_He
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
On one hand, if a priest says a prayer of consecration, in any language, the host is consecrated. The end result is met.

On the other hand, one of the major advantages to the Latin is that the language, being “dead” is fixed. The words retain their meaning over time. In languages that are living, the meaning of words change. Words have everyday meanings, and in 20 years, there’s no telling what some of them will mean. So some of the words of the liturgy could lose their meaning or worse, change their meaning in a negative way. So 20 years from now, where do you turn to make sure you haven’t lost something important?

Greek was one of the early languages during development of the Church, but Greek is still spoken today, so what happens when you are trying to determine the original meaning of words or phrases? It gives scholars something to debate about.

In Latin, the words mean the same thing they did centuries ago. In reality, there are some changes in Latin over time, but not like in living languages.

Also, Latin has the advantage that it common in religion and science around the world. So in America, you can find people that have studied Latin, and in Europe, you can find people that have studied Latin, and in Asia, you can find people that have studied Latin, and it is spoken the same wherever you find people that have studied it.

So, given the early roots of the Church development in Rome, Latin gives us a common bond around the world.
 
Perhaps one could say this about the Western/Latin Church, but when one broadens one’s ecclesiology and accepts that the Catholic Church is made up of a communion of local/particular Churches each having their own ancient and venerable traditions, then one sees how lacking this argument is.

First, as an aside, the form of Greek used in the Greek Liturgy is not the same as the form spoken today. In fact, native Greek speakers do not understand the Greek Liturgy unless they’ve studied that form of Greek. I believe they use Koine Greek, which is the same Greek used in the translations of the Scriptures that predate the Vulgate.

Second, there has never been one universal language within the Church. The Church has always maintained a multiplicity of languages (and even a diversity in understanding the core essentials of the Faith) while at the same time maintaining communion between the particular Churches. Latin, Greek, Coptic, Ge’ez, Syriac, etc., etc., etc. have all been used since the earliest times in the Church.

Third, even within the Western/Latin part of the Church I do not believe Latin has been exclusively used. In fact, Sts. Cyril and Methodius originally translated a Latin Rite into Slavonic for the sake of converting the Slavic peoples. I’ve also heard that the Roman Rite, even prior to Trent, was translated into such languages as Chinese and perhaps some of the African dialects for the sake of evangelization. When certain missionaries went down to India they translated the Mass into the native language there in order to evangelize (despite the fact that there were already Christians with an Apostolic tradition down there).

Finally, this whole notion that the Church is united by a common language is just silly. It is not language that unites us, it is the Faith; and the Faith can be, and is, expressed in a multiplicity of languages.

I’m not saying that Latin should be abandoned, or that it should not be retained. It should certainly be retained… in the Roman Church. But folks need to abandon this idea that Latin is what unites the entire Church. It’s not, and never was. There are other Catholic Churches out there (the Eastern Catholic Churches) for whom Latin was never a language used either liturgically or to communicate, and yet those Churches are still in communion with Rome, still every bit as Catholic as the Roman Church, and still every bit as faithful to Tradition.
 
One other note. Anyone who has ever studied Latin knows that almost every single word in Latin has a plethora of meanings and nuances. So what’s going to be the correct understanding of a word used in the Liturgy and in theological texts? What determines our understanding? Certainly not the consensus of scholars, but the consensus of Tradition. Our Faith rests upon Jesus Christ and His teachings as they are presented in Scripture and Tradition, and interpreted and upheld by the Magisterium, not on a language (ancient/dead or otherwise).
 
I have heard that about a dozen modern languages have their origin in Latin --Spanish, Portuguese, Italian, French, Romanian, and several others.🤷
 
 
Phillip_Rolfes said:
One other note. Anyone who has ever studied Latin knows that almost every single word in Latin has a plethora of meanings and nuances.
Click to expand...
This is true. That’s where context comes into play but that’s an argument for studying all the Latin behind the prayer, not just the literal word for word, where we have to guess at the right word to use. The way translations are normally done, they essentially “lock” in a meaning which later on could prove wrong, as we’ve found out first with the St. Joseph Missal and then with the 60’s ICEL translations. And let’s not forget the Vatican’s translations of colere as “worship” and then we end up worshipping Mary.I can go into all kinds of incompatibility issues between Latin and English, including the subjunctive which is so important in prayer, but I’ll hold off that argument for another thread.
 
ProVobis said:
Indeed.

google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.jesterbear.com/Aradia/Italic.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.jesterbear.com/Aradia/tree.html&h=244&w=289&sz=11&tbnid=0RUUKhAI2zcPAM:&tbnh=116&tbnw=137&zoom=1&usg=__gBiaJrXSmUhxVfoRtyvzXqpw1wk=&docid=ihELyUz39AY4KM&sa=X&ei=46KYUvLAEdjUoAS5yIL4DA&ved=0CE0Q9QEwBA

google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://andromeda.rutgers.edu/~jlynch/language.gif&imgrefurl=http://andromeda.rutgers.edu/~jlynch/language.html&h=560&w=746&sz=11&tbnid=tdYdsPAeSW0QFM:&tbnh=95&tbnw=126&zoom=1&usg=__rBNxPVWs86o1Y96x9MINo38_o78=&docid=l8ro1hlaNn1ROM&sa=X&ei=46KYUvLAEdjUoAS5yIL4DA&ved=0CEsQ9QEwAw
Click to expand...
Did you know that on the “premium” channel of churchmilitant.tv they have a program of a guy teaching Latin? His name is Jim Wilder. I watched it a few times. Interesting, but complicated. Wish I’d studied Latin in high school when I had the chance, but at that time I wasn’t Catholic, never dreamed I’d BE Catholic, and just never saw the need. Didn’t know I’d ever be surrounded by Spanish or other people where I’d want to learn their language either!🤷
 
Phillip_Rolfes said:
One other note. Anyone who has ever studied Latin knows that almost every single word in Latin has a plethora of meanings and nuances. So what’s going to be the correct understanding of a word used in the Liturgy and in theological texts? What determines our understanding? Certainly not the consensus of scholars, but the consensus of Tradition. Our Faith rests upon Jesus Christ and His teachings as they are presented in Scripture and Tradition, and interpreted and upheld by the Magisterium, not on a language (ancient/dead or otherwise).
Click to expand...
One further thought on this. While a word like “sanctus” can have the meanings of “holy, saint” maybe it doesn’t really make a difference except in the English. I know the Anglophones would make a big deal whether one is used over the other (and they probably should) but in the Latin (or Polish, for that matter) it’s not heretical to call a saint a holy person man or vice versa. Nor in the case of Spiritus Sanctus either, if that makes sense.
 
Truth1611 said:
Guys, look, Jesus Christ and the apostles never spoke Latin so why should we?
Click to expand...
They also didn’t hang out in bluejeans in someone’s house with a drum circle and an acoustic guitar and call it worship.
 
Alveus_Lacuna said:
They also didn’t hang out in bluejeans in someone’s house with a drum circle and an acoustic guitar and call it worship.
Click to expand...
Besides without electricity they’d have had to played an electric guitar by candle-light:D
 
Truth1611 said:
Guys, look, Jesus Christ and the apostles never spoke Latin so why should we?
Click to expand...
I’m doubting that the Lord had his conversation with Pilate in Hebrew. If the Jews in Palestine didn’t speak Latin, it was the same way the Poles didn’t speak Russian!

OTOH, since speaking in tongues is a capacity given by the Holy Spirit, it stands to reason that there was no language the Lord could not have understood or spoken, had he the need.

The first answer supplied to the original was the best. Latin is the definitive language of the Church. It isn’t a lot more complicated than that.
 
ProVobis said:
One further thought on this. While a word like “sanctus” can have the meanings of “holy, saint” maybe it doesn’t really make a difference except in the English. I know the Anglophones would make a big deal whether one is used over the other (and they probably should) but in the Latin (or Polish, for that matter) it’s not heretical to call a saint a holy person man or vice versa. Nor in the case of Spiritus Sanctus either, if that makes sense.
Click to expand...
English has a few problems in that regard. Greek, as I understand it, has four words for “love”, I am familiar with two: “eros” and “agape”, which mean slightly different things…
 
John_Lazarus said:
English has a few problems in that regard. Greek, as I understand it, has four words for “love”, I am familiar with two: “eros” and “agape”, which mean slightly different things…
Click to expand...
Here’s a video for a Latin lesson!😃

► 1:52► 1:52
www.youtube.com/watch?v=ldVFC0tPBqw
Jun 21, 2009 - Uploaded by John1948Ten
They weren’t brothers, but Bill Medley and Bobby Hatfield (both born in 1940) were most …
 
John_Lazarus said:
English has a few problems in that regard. Greek, as I understand it, has four words for “love”, I am familiar with two: “eros” and “agape”, which mean slightly different things…
Click to expand...
from Wiki
Ancient Greeks identified four forms of love: kinship or familiarity (in Greek, storge), friendship (philia), sexual and/or romantic desire (eros), and self-emptying or divine love (agape).
…
The Latin language has several different verbs corresponding to the English word “love.” amō is the basic verb meaning I love, with the infinitive amare (“to love”) as it still is in Italian today. The Romans used it both in an affectionate sense as well as in a romantic or sexual sense. From this verb come amans—a lover, amator, “professional lover,” often with the accessory notion of lechery—and amica, “girlfriend” in the English sense, often being applied euphemistically to a prostitute. The corresponding noun is amor (the significance of this term for the Romans is well illustrated in the fact, that the name of the City, Rome—in Latin: Roma—can be viewed as an anagram for amor, which was used as the secret name of the City in wide circles in ancient times),[27] which is also used in the plural form to indicate love affairs or sexual adventures. This same root also produces amicus—“friend”—and amicitia, “friendship” (often based to mutual advantage, and corresponding sometimes more closely to “indebtedness” or “influence”). Cicero wrote a treatise called On Friendship (de Amicitia), which discusses the notion at some length. Ovid wrote a guide to dating called Ars Amatoria (The Art of Love), which addresses, in depth, everything from extramarital affairs to overprotective parents.
Click to expand...
Latin sometimes uses amāre where English would simply say to like. This notion, however, is much more generally expressed in Latin by placere or delectāre, which are used more colloquially, the latter used frequently in the love poetry of Catullus. Diligere often has the notion “to be affectionate for,” “to esteem,” and rarely if ever is used for romantic love. This word would be appropriate to describe the friendship of two men. The corresponding noun diligentia, however, has the meaning of “diligence” or “carefulness,” and has little semantic overlap with the verb. Observare is a synonym for diligere; despite the cognate with English, this verb and its corresponding noun, observantia, often denote “esteem” or “affection.” Caritas is used in Latin translations of the Christian Bible to mean “charitable love”; this meaning, however, is not found in Classical pagan Roman literature. As it arises from a conflation with a Greek word, there is no corresponding verb.
Click to expand...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Love
 
Blessed_is_He said:
Why is the TOM in Latin instead of going all the way back to Aramaic?
Click to expand...
I think it is because Latin is the language of the Roman Rite, but also because I believe it points to the cross! Someone can correct me if I’m wrong but I believe there is a little bit of Greek and Hebrew in the Tridentine Mass, which if true would be neat since it would remind us of the cross where a sign above Christ was written in Latin, Greek, and Hebrew; King of the Jews. I like to think that Christ made these languages sacred by having them on His cross.
 
Hypnotoad said:
I think it is because Latin is the language of the Roman Rite, but also because I believe it points to the cross! Someone can correct me if I’m wrong but I believe there is a little bit of Greek and Hebrew in the Tridentine Mass, which if true would be neat since it would remind us of the cross where a sign above Christ was written in Latin, Greek, and Hebrew; King of the Jews. I like to think that Christ made these languages sacred by having them on His cross.
Click to expand...
Maybe Tom just doesn’t understand Aramaic, only Latin:D
 
Hypnotoad said:
I think it is because Latin is the language of the Roman Rite, but also because I believe it points to the cross! Someone can correct me if I’m wrong but I believe there is a little bit of Greek and Hebrew in the Tridentine Mass, which if true would be neat since it would remind us of the cross where a sign above Christ was written in Latin, Greek, and Hebrew; King of the Jews. I like to think that Christ made these languages sacred by having them on His cross.
Click to expand...
There is the Kyrie in Greek, but I don’t believe there’s anything in Aramaic? (Except obviously for the Gospel readings which quote Jesus in Aramaic.)
 
I guess I can list some reasons.
  1. It’s the language of the Church and has been for probably about 1500 years.
  2. It’s universal. One can attend a Mass in any country and hear the same Mass.
  3. The words don’t change with time. Latin no longer changes so none of the prayers will ever change their meanings.
  4. Most of the prayers in the Mass were originally written in Latin. Therefore the meanings are more pure.
  5. Latin was on the Cross, every other language in the world except Greek and Hebrew were not.
  6. A wealth of Catholic music and prayers were written in Latin. As such, if Latin is not used, the faithful lose out on the treasures of the Church’s history.
  7. It’s a prettier sounding language than English (:D)
  8. It requires effort to learn and understand, rather than just showing up.
  9. Just as the Jews have an official language for worship (Hebrew), so too did the Catholic Church until the OF allowed for the vernacular. When Jesus worshiped in the temple, he did so in Hebrew.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top